Heathkit

I'm not a ham, is that a good value in kit form for what it is?

I just finished restoring the only Heathkit product I own from back in the day, the IT-11 capacitor checker:

All original Daystrom tubes looks like, but all the voltages were low because someone had put the wrong value dropping resistors (as compared with the schematic) in the supply filter and didn't notice for 40 years.

I have an original IT-11 that we still use in our shop from time to time. Don't think I've ever recapped it since I built in back in the early 60s. Probably should, eh?

John :-#)#

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup) 
                      John's Jukes Ltd. 
MOVED to #7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3 
          (604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) 
                      www.flippers.com 
        "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."

First, if you are not a ham, you would probably not benefit from it. Second, my personal opinion is that it is over-priced for a kit. Third, I'm not particularly fond of the wood slabs on the sides.

YMMV

Yeah, recapping/recalibration is cheap and only takes about an hour to do; there are only 2 electrolytic filter caps and a half-dozen papers. Probably good to install 2 100k 1 watt resistors in parallel as they connected two 40uF 350 volt types in series but didn't balance them in any way.

The schematic shows four 47k 2 watt resistors in series-parallel as droppers after the filter caps but this one had 68k resistors in it for some reason, which had drifted with age into the low 70s. The 6E5 was pretty dim and NOS 6E5s aren't cheap, but it only had 150 volts on the plate instead of the specified 200. With 200 on the plate it brightened up.

There's a cheap Russian version of the 6E5 but one would have to swap in an octal socket.

Probably want to check the resistances on the divider in the leakage test circuit too, mine are about 30-40 volts out of whack at the high end.

Maybe test the rectifier and amplifier tubes for emission/transconductance, too.

So yeah, just strip the whole thing down to the chassis and rebuild it. ;-)

No specs, no feature list, no list of possible applications, no reviews, no indication of what's inside the box, and no clue why they put a "precision" instrument inside a partly wooden box. The sole picture looks like a mockup or Photoshop creation. Yet, Heathkit wants $575 for honor of getting a surprise should it ever arrive.

The above URL talks about a 62 page patent application but gives no application number. All I could find assigned to Heathkit were these two applications for other Heathkit products: (Notice that the inventors are from Santa Cruz CA).

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com 
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Well, if it's as good as they claim, it sounds like a useful gizmo. I'm not a ham myself, but if I were I could see shelling out $600 for a sporting chance once more details come out.

With the end grain exposed, no less. Probably an attempt at a unique look for a small tooling investment.

Getting that claimed 2% accuracy will require quite good connectors and directional couplers, as well, which are fairly far from cheap.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Probably it hasn't been published yet. On the other hand one might expect a few more details of how it works if they've really filed a broad utility patent, but of course that would give the Chinese pirates a running start.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs  
Principal Consultant  
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC  
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics  

160 North State Road #203  
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510  

hobbs at electrooptical dot net  
http://electrooptical.net

ot a ham myself, but if I were I could see shelling out $600 for a sporting chance once more details come out.

irectional couplers, as well, which are fairly far from cheap.

I am a ham, but can not see shelling out $600 for a swr meter. My reasonin g is that 2 % accuracy is not worth much. Having it repeatable is worth so mething, but what you want to do is get the best swr that you can. And onc e you do that, you probably will not use it again for a long time.

Dan AD7PI

I'm always a little skeptical of advertising copy that slams the "other guy's" product without providing too many specifics about the "this guy's" product in the fashion of this meter's copy.

"It computes ERP for you, even alerts you if you exceed regulations. Good thing, since knowing your ERP is required by law. No other meter does this (or will, due to our patent filing)."

62 pages?!

? 0.1?

And the gizmo is also a multi-head power meter and frequency counter.

Now that they seem to be doing actual products, I'd like to see them succee d, even if they're in Santa Cruz and not Benton Harbor.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

They likely haven't filed yet, it sounds like they've submitted a "provisional application."

62 pages is way too long for anything involving patents, like they've disclosed a ton of shit they didn't have to. It's retarded to disclose anything other than precisely what's necessary for the quid-pro-quo. "Here's the novel thing. This is why it's novel." The End

Sure, it's start-up PR. But to be fair, an instrument aimed at hams is comp eting against every old VSWR and power meter since the dawn of time, in eve ry condition and state of calibration.

I'm a boat-anchor fan myself--if you know what you're buying, the used mark et these days is amazing. Not as amazing as in 2009, but still very good. I 've equipped what I think is a pretty amazing private lab for about 3 cents on the dollar.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs  
Principal Consultant  
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC  
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics  

160 North State Road #203  
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510  

hobbs at electrooptical dot net

Not so. Broad disclosure has at least three important functions. First, it defends you against invalidation based on indefiniteness or lack of written description.

Second, it prevents somebody else patenting the undisclosed stuff you're us ing and then coming after you for infringement.

Third, if somebody starts using stuff you disclosed but didn't claim, you c an file a continuation and then go after them. You can't get royalties retr oactively, but you can get them.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs  
Principal Consultant  
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC  
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics  

160 North State Road #203  
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510  

hobbs at electrooptical dot net

I admit you sort of need to have brass balls to toss a new gizmo into the shark tank of cantakerous old hams!

Yeah it's great! God knows what my 100MHz Kikuisi cost in 1986 or whatever. Probably about as much as a Cadillac Eldorado!

Overall a way better and more reliable product than an '86 Cadillac, too

I can see those as advantages as all those situations seem plausible, but in 2k17 which situation is most likely? I would hazard a guess it's the third, and if your product is successful in the electronics world the most likely perps will be the Chinese, and gee whiz do we really need to hand them an instruction manual on how to copy it, too?

How often is broad disclosure done in practice and does it vary by industry? It sounds like one of those things that could be the right call but would have to be handled just right from a legal perspective to get any advantage.

I've paid ~$40k for what is probably over a million bucks' worth of top-of-the-line stuff at list prices: .

It's nice when most of your toys are tax-deductible. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs  
Principal Consultant  
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC  
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics  

160 North State Road #203  
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510  

hobbs at electrooptical dot net  
http://electrooptical.net

My girlfriend is giving a little talk to some of her Chinese exchange students today about why "Powerpoint project appropriation" is not considered an "acceptable practice" from a cultural perspective in the US. This shit seems ingrained from an early age!